Worldwide Disparities in Recovery of Cardiac Testing 1 Year Into COVID-19

BACKGROUND The extent to which health care systems have adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic to provide necessary cardiac diagnostic services is unknown. OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine the impact of the pandemic on cardiac testing practices, volumes and types of diagnostic services, and perceived psychological stress to health care providers worldwide. METHODS The International Atomic Energy Agency conducted a worldwide survey assessing alterations from baseline in cardiovascular diagnostic care at the pandemic's onset and 1 year later. Multivariable regression was used to determine factors associated with procedure volume recovery. RESULTS Surveys were submitted from 669 centers in 107 countries. Worldwide reduction in cardiac procedure volumes of 64% from March 2019 to April 2020 recovered by April 2021 in high- and upper middle-income countries (recovery rates of 108% and 99%) but remained depressed in lower middle- and low-income countries (46% and 30% recovery). Although stress testing was used 12% less frequently in 2021 than in 2019, coronary computed tomographic angiography was used 14% more, a trend also seen for other advanced cardiac imaging modalities (positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance; 22%-25% increases). Pandemic-related psychological stress was estimated to have affected nearly 40% of staff, impacting patient care at 78% of sites. In multivariable regression, only lower-income status and physicians' psychological stress were significant in predicting recovery of cardiac testing. CONCLUSIONS Cardiac diagnostic testing has yet to recover to prepandemic levels in lower-income countries. Worldwide, the decrease in standard stress testing is offset by greater use of advanced cardiac imaging modalities. Pandemic-related psychological stress among providers is widespread and associated with poor recovery of cardiac testing

Disparities in Non-invasive Traditional and Advanced Testing for Coronary Artery Disease: Findings from the INCAPS-COVID 2 Study

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted delivery of cardiovascular care including non-invasive testing protocols and test selection for evaluation of coronary artery disease (CAD). Trends in test selection among traditional versus advanced noninvasive tests for CAD during the pandemic and among countries of varying income status have not been well studied. The International Atomic Energy Agency conducted a global survey to assess pandemic-related changes in the practice of cardiovascular diagnostic testing. Site procedural volumes for noninvasive tests to evaluate CAD from March 2019 (pre-pandemic), April 2020 (onset), and April 2021 (initial recovery) were collected. We considered traditional testing modalities exercise electrocardiography (ECG), stress echocardiography, and stress single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and advanced testing modalities stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), and stress positron emission tomography (PET). Survey data were obtained from 669 centers in 107 countries, reporting the performance of 367,933 studies for CAD during the study period. Compared to 2019, traditional tests were performed 14% less frequently (recovery rate 82%) in 2021 versus advanced tests which were performed 15% more frequently (128% recovery rate). CCTA, stress CMR and stress PET showed 14%, 25%, and 25% increases in volumes from 2019 to 2021, respectively. The increase in advanced testing was isolated to high- and upper-middle-income countries, with 132% recovery in advanced tests by 2021 as compared to 55% in lower-income nations. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated economic disparities in CAD testing practice between wealthy and poorer countries. Greater recovery rates and even new growth was observed for advanced imaging modalities but this growth was restricted to wealthy countries. Efforts to reduce practice variations in CAD testing due to economic status are warranted.<br/

Recovery Rates of Diagnostic Cardiac Procedural Volume in Oceania 1 Year Into COVID-19: The IAEA Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocol Survey on COVID-19 (INCAPS COVID 2)

AimThe aim of this study was to assess the recovery rates of diagnostic cardiac procedure volumes in the Oceania Region, midway through the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsA survey was performed comparing procedure volumes between March 2019 (pre-pandemic), April 2020 (during first wave of COVID-19 pandemic), and April 2021 (1 year into the COVID-19 pandemic). A total of 31 health care facilities within Oceania that perform cardiac diagnostic procedures were surveyed, including a mixture of metropolitan and regional, hospital and outpatient, public and private sites, as well as teaching and non-teaching hospitals. A comparison was made with 549 centres in 96 countries in the rest of the world (RoW) outside of Oceania. The total number and median percentage change in procedure volume were measured between the three timepoints, compared by test type and by facility.ResultsA total of 11,902 cardiac diagnostic procedures were performed in Oceania in April 2021 as compared with 11,835 pre-pandemic in March 2019 and 5,986 in April 2020; whereas, in the RoW, 499,079 procedures were performed in April 2021 compared with 497,615 pre-pandemic in March 2019 and 179,014 in April 2020. There was no significant difference in the median recovery rates for total procedure volumes between Oceania (−6%) and the RoW (−3%) (p=0.81). While there was no statistically significant difference in percentage recovery been functional ischaemia testing and anatomical coronary testing in Oceania as compared with the RoW, there was, however, a suggestion of poorer recovery in anatomical coronary testing in Oceania as compared with the RoW (CT coronary angiography -16% in Oceania vs −1% in RoW, and invasive coronary angiography −20% in Oceania vs −9% in RoW). There was no statistically significant difference in recovery rates in procedure volume between metropolitan vs regional (p=0.44), public vs private (p=0.92), hospital vs outpatient (p=0.79), or teaching vs non-teaching centres (p=0.73).ConclusionsTotal cardiology procedure volumes in Oceania normalised 1 year post-pandemic compared to pre-pandemic levels, with no significant difference compared with the RoW and between the different types of health care facilities. <br/

International Impact of COVID-19 on the Diagnosis of Heart Disease

BACKGROUND The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has adversely affected diagnosis and treatment of noncommunicable diseases. Its effects on delivery of diagnostic care for cardiovascular disease, which remains the leading cause of death worldwide, have not been quantified. OBJECTIVES The study sought to assess COVID-19's impact on global cardiovascular diagnostic procedural volumes and safety practices. METHODS The International Atomic Energy Agency conducted a worldwide survey assessing alterations in cardiovascular procedure volumes and safety practices resulting from COVID-19. Noninvasive and invasive cardiac testing volumes were obtained from participating sites for March and April 2020 and compared with those from March 2019. Availability of personal protective equipment and pandemic-related testing practice changes were ascertained. RESULTS Surveys were submitted from 909 inpatient and outpatient centers performing cardiac diagnostic procedures, in 108 countries. Procedure volumes decreased 42% from March 2019 to March 2020, and 64% from March 2019 to April 2020. Transthoracic echocardiography decreased by 59%, transesophageal echocardiography 76%, and stress tests 78%, which varied between stress modalities. Coronary angiography (invasive or computed tomography) decreased 55% (p < 0.001 for each procedure). In multivariable regression, significantly greater reduction in procedures occurred for centers in countries with lower gross domestic product. Location in a low-income and lower-middle-income country was associated with an additional 22% reduction in cardiac procedures and less availability of personal protective equipment and telehealth. CONCLUSIONS COVID-19 was associated with a significant and abrupt reduction in cardiovascular diagnostic testing across the globe, especially affecting the world's economically challenged. Further study of cardiovascular outcomes and COVID-19-related changes in care delivery is warranted

Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection

Inter-reader variability of SPECT MPI readings in low- and middle-income countries: Results from the IAEA-MPI Audit Project (I-MAP)

BACKGROUND: Consistency of results between different readers is an important issue in medical imaging, as it affects portability of results between institutions and may affect patient care. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in pursuing its mission of fostering peaceful applications of nuclear technologies has supported several training activities in the field of nuclear cardiology (NC) and SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) in particular. The aim of this study was to verify the outcome of those activities through an international clinical audit on MPI where participants were requested to report on studies distributed from a core lab. METHODS: The study was run in two phases: in phase 1, SPECT MPI studies were distributed as raw data and full processing was requested as per local practice. In phase 2, images from studies pre-processed at the core lab were distributed. Data to be reported included summed stress score (SSS); summed rest score (SRS); summed difference score (SDS); left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) and end- diastolic volume (EDV). Qualitative appraisals included the assessment of perfusion and presence of ischemia, scar or mixed patterns, presence of transient ischemic dilation (TID), and risk for cardiac events (CE). Twenty-four previous trainees from low- and middle-income countries participated (core participants group) and their results were assessed for inter-observer variability in each of the two phases, and for changes between phases. The same evaluations were performed for a group of eleven international experts (experts group). Results were also compared between the groups. RESULTS: Expert readers showed an excellent level of agreement for all parameters in both phase 1 and 2. For core participants, the concordance of all parameters in phase 1 was rated as good to excellent. Two parameters which were re-evaluated in phase 2, namely SSS and SRS, showed an increased level of concordance, up to excellent in both cases. Reporting of categorical variables by expert readers remained almost unchanged between the two phases, while core participants showed an increase in phase 2. Finally, pooled LVEF values did not show a significant difference between core participants and experts. However, significant differences were found between LVEF values obtained using different software packages for cardiac analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, inter-observer agreement was moderate-to-good for core group readers and good-to-excellent for expert readers. The quality of reporting is affected by the quality of processing. These results confirm the important role of the IAEA training activities in improving imaging in low- and middle-income countries

Impact of COVID-19 on Cardiovascular Testing in the United States Versus the Rest of the World

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-U.S. institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality.Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States.Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p &lt; 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection.</p

Impact of COVID-19 on diagnostic cardiac procedural volume in Oceania: the IAEA Non-invasive Cardiology Protocol Survey on COVID-19 (INCAPS COVID)

OBJECTIVES: The INCAPS COVID Oceania study aimed to assess the impact caused by the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac procedure volume provided in the Oceania region. METHODS: A retrospective survey was performed comparing procedure volumes within March 2019 (pre-COVID-19) with April 2020 (during first wave of COVID-19 pandemic). Sixty-three (63) health care facilities within Oceania that perform cardiac diagnostic procedures were surveyed, including a mixture of metropolitan and regional, hospital and outpatient, public and private sites, and 846 facilities outside of Oceania. The percentage change in procedure volume was measured between March 2019 and April 2020, compared by test type and by facility. RESULTS: In Oceania, the total cardiac diagnostic procedure volume was reduced by 52.2% from March 2019 to April 2020, compared to a reduction of 75.9% seen in the rest of the world (p<0.001). Within Oceania sites, this reduction varied significantly between procedure types, but not between types of health care facility. All procedure types (other than stress cardiac magnetic resonance [CMR] and positron emission tomography [PET]) saw significant reductions in volume over this time period (p<0.001). In Oceania, transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) decreased by 51.6%, transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) by 74.0%, and stress tests by 65% overall, which was more pronounced for stress electrocardiograph (ECG) (81.8%) and stress echocardiography (76.7%) compared to stress single-photon emission computerised tomography (SPECT) (44.3%). Invasive coronary angiography decreased by 36.7% in Oceania. CONCLUSION: A significant reduction in cardiac diagnostic procedure volume was seen across all facility types in Oceania and was likely a function of recommendations from cardiac societies and directives from government to minimise spread of COVID-19 amongst patients and staff. Longer term evaluation is important to assess for negative patient outcomes which may relate to deferral of usual models of care within cardiology

Inter-reader variability of SPECT MPI readings in low- and middle-income countries: Results from the IAEA-MPI Audit Project (I-MAP)

Background: Consistency of results between different readers is an important issue in medical imaging, as it affects portability of results between institutions and may affect patient care. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in pursuing its mission of fostering peaceful applications of nuclear technologies has supported several training activities in the field of nuclear cardiology (NC) and SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) in particular. The aim of this study was to verify the outcome of those activities through an international clinical audit on MPI where participants were requested to report on studies distributed from a core lab. Methods: The study was run in two phases: in phase 1, SPECT MPI studies were distributed as raw data and full processing was requested as per local practice. In phase 2, images from studies pre-processed at the core lab were distributed. Data to be reported included summed stress score (SSS); summed rest score (SRS); summed difference score (SDS); left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) and end- diastolic volume (EDV). Qualitative appraisals included the assessment of perfusion and presence of ischemia, scar or mixed patterns, presence of transient ischemic dilation (TID), and risk for cardiac events (CE). Twenty-four previous trainees from low- and middle-income countries participated (core participants group) and their results were assessed for inter-observer variability in each of the two phases, and for changes between phases. The same evaluations were performed for a group of eleven international experts (experts group). Results were also compared between the groups. Results: Expert readers showed an excellent level of agreement for all parameters in both phase 1 and 2. For core participants, the concordance of all parameters in phase 1 was rated as good to excellent. Two parameters which were re-evaluated in phase 2, namely SSS and SRS, showed an increased level of concordance, up to excellent in both cases. Reporting of categorical variables by expert readers remained almost unchanged between the two phases, while core participants showed an increase in phase 2. Finally, pooled LVEF values did not show a significant difference between core participants and experts. However, significant differences were found between LVEF values obtained using different software packages for cardiac analysis. Conclusions: In this study, inter-observer agreement was moderate-to-good for core group readers and good-to-excellent for expert readers. The quality of reporting is affected by the quality of processing. These results confirm the important role of the IAEA training activities in improving imaging in low- and middle-income countries